social and emotional learning -...

Social and Emotional Learning Annotated Bibliography | urcues.org

Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers. Future of Children, 27(1), 137-155. In this paper, the author first defines Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) and describes the characteristics of SEL programs. She then describes the relationship between teachers’ social-emotional wellbeing with their students’ social-emotional learning. Finally, she discusses how to promote the social emotional wellbeing of teachers and how best to develop teachers who know how to teach SEL. The premise of this article is that teachers play an important role in creating environments that promote social emotional wellbeing in their students, and that their effectiveness in implementing social emotional leaning programs has been proven. However, research has also revealed that teaching is a stressful occupation, and the wellbeing of teachers and thus their ability to deliver effective social-emotional learning (SEL) programs cannot be taken for granted. Hence, the dynamics of the relationship between the wellbeing of teachers and that of their students needs further understanding. What is SEL and can it be taught? Any discussion of SEL must include three facets: the student, the teacher and the context. Based on extensive research, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) has identified five interrelated competencies that are central to SEL: self-awareness, self- management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. The author presents a graphic that illustrates how the student, teacher and the classroom/school environment must be aligned with these principles so that SEL can be effectively taught and learned. The author discusses a nationally representative survey of more than 600 teachers that found that large majorities of preschool to high school teachers believe that SEL skills are teachable, that promoting SEL will benefit students from both rich and poor backgrounds, and that SEL has many positive effects on school attendance and graduation, standardized test scores, overall academic performance, college preparation, workforce readiness, and citizenship. The Relationship Between Teachers and Social Emotional Learning Classrooms with warm teacher-child relationships promote deep learning among students. Children who feel comfortable with their teachers and peers are more willing to deal with

Social and Emotional Learning: Annotated Bibliography | 2 The Center for Urban Education Success at the University of Rochester’s Warner School of Education | urcues.org

2

challenging material and persist at difficult learning tasks. Conversely, when teachers poorly manage the social and emotional demands of teaching, students demonstrate lower performance and on-task behavior. Teachers’ social-emotional competence and wellbeing strongly influence classroom climate and the infusion of SEL into classrooms and schools. This author reasons that when we optimize SEL competence in teachers, their students will feel the positive effects and perform better. In addition, school climate, classroom management and student outcomes will all be the beneficiaries.

The author introduces the concept of stress contagion, that is, does teacher burnout contribute to stress levels in students, or do students who enter the classroom with higher levels of stress contribute to teacher stress? The author cites research that suggests that when teachers are trained in the behavioral and emotional factors that influence classroom climate, they feel better equipped to propose and implement classroom management strategies that mollify or neutralize students’ aggressive behaviors and promote a positive learning climate. In short, when students behave, teacher stress level improves and teachers are less likely to leave the profession.

Interventions to Promote Teachers’ SEL Competence

In the past few years, several interventions have specifically sought to improve teachers’ social-emotional competence and stress management in school. Two of these programs are based on mindfulness: CARE (Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education) and SMART-in-Education (Stress Management and Resiliency Training).

When compared to a control group, teachers who received CARE training showed greater improvements in adaptive emotion regulation and mindfulness, and greater reductions in psychological distress and the pressure to hurry through daily tasks. In classrooms of teachers who received CARE training, levels of emotional support were sustained across the school year. In the control-group classrooms emotional support fell as the year went on. Initial research has shown the CARE and SMART programs to be effective in promoting teachers’ SEL competence and wellbeing. In addition, SEL outcomes were strongly influenced by the degree to which teachers felt positive about SEL and their ability to implement it.

Given the importance of teachers’ own social-emotional wellbeing for implementing SEL programs and practices, teacher education shouldn’t just give teacher candidates knowledge about students’ SEL; it should also give them tools and strategies to build their own social and emotional competence. Such an approach would help integrate SEL into the fabric of K–12 schooling and create a generation of students who have acquired the social and emotional competencies they need for their adult roles as citizens, employees, parents, and volunteers.

This article while giving important information on what SEL is, not only focuses on SEL per se, but also offers a perspective of the teachers who are charged to promote the social emotional wellbeing of their students. The author is looking for a change in pre-service education and offers precise guidelines for post service staff development. We all recognize that there are


3

competing demands in pre-service education and it may very well fall to school district staff development programs to deliver the training required to implement SEL programs. This means that school district personnel need to know what SEL is, what programs have proven to be effective and what teachers need in order to be successful. This article will be helpful to those who wish to fortify their proposal for SEL policy development and program implementation. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A., Taylor, R., and Schellinger, K. B. (2011).

The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.

This Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL http://www.casel.org/) sponsored the oft cited meta-analysis examines the effects of school-based Social Emotional Learning (SEL) programming on children’s behaviors and academic performance and discusses the implications of these findings for educational policies and effective practices. Findings are presented from a meta-analysis of 213 school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programs involving 270,034 Kindergarten through high school students. And of this sample 135, 396 student academic data were available for analysis.

This study operated under the hypothesis that SEL competencies provide a foundation for positive social and emotional adjustment and an increase in academic performance. SEL programs foster in students a shift from being controlled by external factors to developing and internalizing values that demonstrate caring and concern for others, making good decisions, and taking responsibility for one’s choices and behaviors.

Extensive developmental research indicates that effective mastery of social-emotional competencies is associated with greater wellbeing and better school performance. Whereas the failure to achieve competence in these areas can lead to a variety of personal, social, and academic difficulties.

Findings from various clinical, prevention, and youth development studies have stimulated the creation of many school-based interventions specifically designed to promote young people’s SEL. At the same time several researchers have questioned the extent to which promoting children’s social and emotional skills will actually improve their behavioral and academic outcomes. This meta-analysis provides the evidence to resolve these conflicting beliefs.

Goals of SEL

As identified by the CASEL in 2005, the goals of SEL programs are to foster the development of five interrelated sets of cognitive, affective, and behavioral competencies: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision making. These competencies, in turn, should provide a foundation for better adjustment and academic performance as reflected in more positive social behaviors, fewer conduct problems, less emotional distress, and improved test scores and grades.


4

In addition, CASEL recommends that program implementation reflect SAFE (Sequenced, Active, Focused, Explicit) characteristics in skill instruction: (a) Does the program use a connected and coordinated set of activities to achieve their objectives relative to skill development? (b) Does the program use active forms of learning to help youth learn new skills? (c) Does the program contain at least one component devoted to developing personal or social skills? and (d) Does the program target specific SEL skills rather than targeting skills or positive development in general terms?

Meta-Analysis Framework

The researchers proposed five (5) hypothesizes:

• SEL school based programs would yield significant mean effects across skill, attitudinal, behavioral, and academic domains (Hypothesis 1)

• Programs conducted by teachers and other school staff would produce significant results (Hypothesis 2)

• Multicomponent programs (within schools and community based) would be more effective than single-component (classroom based) programs (Hypothesis 3)

• Program outcomes would be moderated by the use of all the practices that reflected SAFE (sequenced, active, focused, and explicit) instructional components (Hypothesis 4)

• Programs that encountered problems during program implementation would be less successful than those that did not report such problems (Hypothesis 5).

Methodology

The authors chose studies for inclusion or exclusion based on a set of stated criteria. SAFE interventions were coded dichotomously (yes or no) according to whether or not each of four recommended practices identified by the acronym SAFE was used to develop student skills. The coding that was used in this study and the results of the statistical analysis is described in detail.

Findings

• Compared to controls, SEL participants generally demonstrated significantly improved social and emotional skills and for those students on whom data was available (135, 396 students). In addition, there was an 11-percentile-point gain in academic achievement. (Hypothesis 1)

• It was found that classroom teachers and other school staff effectively conducted SEL programs and did not require outside personnel for their effective delivery. However, it was noted that there were less studies at the secondary level. (Hypothesis 2)

• The researchers did not find the expected additional benefit of multicomponent programs over single-component (i.e., classroom-only) programs. In this meta-analysis, it is explained that this may be due to the fact that compared to classroom-only programs, multicomponent programs were less likely to follow SAFE procedures when promoting


5

student skills and were more likely to encounter implementation problems. (Hypothesis 3-5)

The findings of this study document that SAFE SEL programs yielded significant positive effects on targeted social-emotional competencies and attitudes about self, others, and school. They also enhanced students’ behavioral adjustment in the form of increased pro-social behaviors and reduced conduct and internalizing problems, and improved academic performance on achievement tests and grades.

Educators, who are pressured by the federal requirement to follow guidelines for student discipline, may look to incorporate SEL into their school improvement grants. This review might be welcome information on policy and practices that could boost achievement by 11 percentile points. These results add to a growing body of research indicating that SAFE SEL programming enhances students’ connection to school, classroom behavior, and academic achievement. Educators are cautioned that outcomes were not as strong where there was an inconsistent use of explicit (SAFE) instruction for developing skills and where there were implementation problems.

When making decisions about adopting SEL policy and programs, decision makers would be well served to consider the dynamics at work in SEL programming that provide an improvement in students’ academic performance.

• Students who are more self-aware and confident about their learning capacities try harder and persist in the face of challenges.

• Students who set high academic goals, have self-discipline, motivate themselves, manage their stress, and organize their approach to work learn more and get better grades.

• Students who use problem-solving skills to overcome obstacles and make responsible decisions about studying and completing homework do better academically.

In addition, researchers have highlighted how interpersonal, instructional, and environmental supports produce better school performance through the following means:

• Peer and adult norms that convey high expectations and support for academic success • Caring teacher–student relationships that foster commitment and bonding to school • Engaging teaching approaches such as proactive classroom management and cooperative

learning • Safe and orderly environments that encourage and reinforce positive classroom behavior.

In conclusion, some combination of improvements in student social-emotional competence, the school environment, teacher practices and expectations, and student–teacher relationships contribute to students’ immediate and long-term behavior change, which then results in an increase in achievement.


6

This paper is often cited as evidence that SEL can lead to students’ academic success. It would prove helpful for practitioners who need to provide evidence that SEL works and/or need some guidelines on SEL programming.

Hoffman, D. M., (2009). Reflecting on social emotional learning: A critical perspective on trends

in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 533-556. The purpose of this paper is to present a cultural analysis and critique of social and emotional learning (SEL). The author identifies the implicit models embedded in approaches to SEL and raises questions and concerns of its intended and unintended consequences. In conclusion, the article offers some questions to guide practitioners in their decision-making. Hoffman frames her analysis by suggesting that practitioners of SEL programing have failed to deeply engage with cultural diversity and confront its relationship to the politics of power, that is emotional expression is culturally based and therefore subject to influence by the dominate culture. She reasons that in some ways SEL implementation may adopt a lens that identifies some behavioral problems in terms of individual and/or cultural deficits that present a risk to educational and life success. This is juxtaposed and in opposition to the ideals of developing a culture of empathy, respect and caring that nurture the whole child. Her proposal is that practitioners need to be cognizant that these goals may be in competition with each other if they are to develop meaningful and successful SEL programs, that is teachers’ messaging that we are all in this together. The author urges the practitioner to consider that an SEL program may not reflect, accept or empathize with the culture of students. Issues around SEL involve implicit ideologies of the conditions that affect acceptance and belonging and their links to cultural norms for emotional expression. Different cultures have different values when it comes to expressing and/or revealing emotions and some cultural norms may prove difficult to accept. Programing that does not reflect nor validate the culture of the student, impacts the development of the self when that self is a part of a minority culture placed within a majority-based culture. In this regard SEL practices raise questions of power and the structure of educational opportunity in the United States. SEL may have as its goal to build a caring community, but it may be a source of ideological manipulation, with the threat of improving or not improving one’s personal wellbeing and future success as a core outcome. This means that SEL may put the student in the position of denying his or her culture by adopting the behaviors of the dominant culture, without carving a pathway that is respectful of both. One reason for this mixed messaging is that the literature on teaching emotional intelligence (EI) reveals considerable confusion and overlap among distinct interpretations of EI. Hoffman presents these interpretations as potentially distinct and counterproductive to the goals of SEL. For example, some school-based SEL programs are skills based, teaching students how to interpret and manage emotions and responses. As opposed to other programs that emphasize


7

teaching of conflict resolution, caring, or community building, in which the focus on specific EI competencies and skills is secondary to building relationships and community. In addition to portraying SEL as a road to academic and personal success for students, the literature paints a picture of benefits to teachers who feel "empowered" or otherwise in control of classroom situations that they ordinarily would find challenging and disruptive. The author warns that what is essentially happening is that when it comes to describing and recommending actual practices of classroom management, the language of caring often “Devolves to a discourse about control, rules, contracts, choices, activities, and organizational structures” (p. 545). In effect, caring and community are things teachers teach children to do by getting them to behave in appropriate ways – This under the guise of teaching children to care. Caring and community become lessons taught by teachers to children rather than deeply felt shared emotions embedded in the relationships of the classroom. Stated another way the basic question concerns the consequences for human relationships when the focus is on behavioral and cognitive skills as a means to success, rather than as a good in itself for personal wellbeing and positive relationships. Unless a parallel emphasis is placed on the qualities of relationships that contextualize skills and behaviors, the discourse risks promoting a shallow, decontextualized, and narrowly instrumentalist approach to emotion in classrooms that promotes measurability and efficiency at the expense of qualities of relatedness. (See Yaeger below for a different conclusion of what motivates adolescents.) It is not simply a matter of teaching students topics and skills associated with social-emotional learning. It is essentially a matter of showing, by our own acts and attitudes, that we care about what students are going through and that we are partners in the search for meaning. On a more positive note, the author notes that it may be easier to implement the ideals of caring and community in some cultural contexts than in others. Seeking evidence of communities and schools that have been successful in developing practices that reflect their own visions of care can serve as models for others to learn from. If viewed as a resource instead of as a problem to be solved, the very existence of cultural variation in U.S. classrooms can provide opportunities to discover alternative ways to develop practices that can support ideals and goals of emotional learning. Questions that might be asked in developing SEL programming related to cultural diversity and implicit cultural bias are:

• Does a curriculum in emotional skills adequately engage with or reflect cultural diversity, or does it presume a single model of emotional competency valid across all cultural contexts?

• Is the very concept of emotional skills a useful and viable one, or would we be better off looking at emotion through less of a skill-based lens?

• What are the assumptions made about the individual and emotion, and what are the central (implicit) values reflected in the strategies or discourse used to approach emotion?

• How are notions of control, power, and choice embedded in various ways of talking about SEL?


8

• Does discourse on SEL represent the emergence of a sea change in American education - a real effort to change our entire view of learning and development - or is it old stuff in a new guise?

This critical cultural analysis may prove helpful to leaders who want to engage staff to be mindful when reflecting on SEL implementation. Discussions of cultural bias and power are complex and difficult to engage in. Leading these discussions requires great skill and patience otherwise unintended consequences may result. It may be important to note before sharing this article that it presents rather than clarifies what exercising power looks like in different classrooms. For example, some research analyzes classroom discourse that documents teacher talk. The purpose of this discourse analysis is to illustrate and interpret the meaning and result of classroom interactions. Also, implicit in this paper are the competing foundational arguments of behaviorism vs. constructivism, assimilation vs. accommodation, and individualism vs. compliance. In a staff discussion, such concepts may be used to clarify and identify assumptions about teaching and learning. Restorative justice circles provide a means to develop student voices in solving conflict in relationship building. Schools that provide restorative justice circles may find this article useful in comparing their practice with the cautions this author presents. In summary participation in such a dialogue may build a common vocabulary and understanding of what it means to teach and learn in this school and may be one exercise that helps bring a school community closer to such an understanding. Arguedas, M., Daradoumis, T., & Xhafa, F. (2016). Analyzing How Emotion Awareness Influences Students’ Motivation, Engagement, Self-Regulation and Learning Outcome. Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 87–103. These researchers from the University of Catalunya, Spain are interested in the role that emotions play in learning and how emotional awareness mediates behavior and learning. They are also interested in how technology can advance and enhance learning. This paper is interesting because it uses technology to collect and analyze classroom discourse. It meets the need to provide research in the secondary classroom as well as making visible and quantifiable the manifestations of emotion in students. The main goal of this work was to analyze the effects of students’ emotional awareness on their motivation, engagement, self-regulation and learning. An additional goal examined the way a teacher’s emotional awareness affects his or her attitude and the quality of his/her feedback. While a review of the literature reveals the need of both the students’ emotional awareness and teachers’ affective feedback as two important elements in a student’s learning process, there is not yet an extensive analysis of this relationship.


9

This study employed discourse analysis method to analyze text and conversation generated by students while in a collaborative learning unit in order to identify and represent the students’ emotions. This emotional information was shown to the teacher and the students in the experimental group (EG), which enabled the teacher to offer students pertinent cognitive and affective feedback. In contrast, the students in the control group (CG) were not made aware of any emotion information. Data analysis and methodology: The students were engaged in a learning unit, “Introduction to the Internet,” which employed problem based learning and the collaborative structure of Jigsaw, taught 3x/week for 5 weeks. Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered using observations and questionnaires in order to measure and evaluate learners’ emotional state and teacher behaviors concerning two units of analysis: Emotion Awareness (EA) and Affective Feedback (AF). More specifically, discourse (text and conversations) was divided into segments and then analyzed in order to discover and show all the emotions embedded in them. That is individual statements were categorized as intentional (giving information) or emotional. By using Wiki text, and then applying Sentiment Analysis and the author’s Rhetorical Structure Theory tool, the effect of the emotional exchange was noted for each student and tabulated. Using descriptive statistics, researchers calculated relative frequencies as well as graphics. They also used bivariate correlation and analysis of variance to find relationships between the variables under study for each of the questions of the study. To ensure the reliability of data collection, they applied Cronbach’s alpha coefficient as well as the skewness and kurtosis for each variable that was examined in order to check for multivariate normality. As a result of the outcomes of these statistical models, they concluded that there was no critical problem regarding multivariate normality in the questionnaires. Once the data obtained in the questionnaires was gathered, they calculated the Pearson correlation coefficient for the different variables to answer the research questions. Results: The results of this study show that when students in the experimental group (EG) were made aware of their emotions, their learning performance was better than the control group (CG). Likewise, when teachers were informed of students’ emotional state their attitude and feedback became more effective and timely. 1. In regard to the first research question, (Is there a significant correlation between students’ emotion awareness and their motivation and engagement in learning?), students in both groups showed high levels of motivation as evidenced by positive emotions such as joy, as well as strong concentration to the task and solidarity with their peers. However, in the presence of not so positive emotions (such as sadness/shame, fear/anxiety, and anger/frustration), CG students felt very bored and displayed a high tendency to dispute, which


10

led them to lose motivation to continue their activities. Moreover, they showed low solidarity to their peers. Finally, when they felt anger or frustration, they had a strong lack of self-confidence. In contrast, when EG students felt negative emotions such as anxiety or frustration, they were able to maintain at least a minimum interest in the activity. Moreover, when these students felt sad, they were able to receive and provide suggestions and opinions in a constructive way, thus they managed to maintain their engagement during the development of the activity. As a consequence of the above, the conclusion that there is a significant positive correlation between emotion awareness and students’ motivation and engagement in learning was shown. 2. In regard of the second research question, (Is there any significant correlation between students’ emotion awareness and their self-regulation and learning outcome?), CG students obtained lower scores in self-regulation, illustrated by a delayed start to the activity, fewer necessary changes that could lead towards a more positive behavior faster, a less timely involvement to create and share knowledge, did not improve their performance when under a time constraint, and a less balanced distribution of their workload. In contrast, EG students achieved much better results in self-regulating skills, including timely participation and effective knowledge management that scored above 90% and which contributed to enhanced teamwork and a more effective development of the activity. Considering learning outcomes, EG students performed better than CG students. One of the reasons for achieving a better learning outcome is grounded in building a high degree of group solidarity and cohesion, which favors trust and engagement among the members of the group. The authors reasoned that students’ emotion awareness of themselves and their peers during the whole activity provided them with an important tool to develop emotional competence for the group and thus build an emotionally intelligent team. As a result, the researchers were able to claim that there is a significant positive correlation between emotional awareness and students’ self-regulation and learning outcome. 3. In regard to the third research question, (Is there a significant correlation between teacher’s awareness about students’ emotion and his/her attitude and feedback?), the teacher demonstrated the capability to be aware of students’ emotions both in CG and EG. From the above results, the researchers observed that the teacher intervened and supported both groups in almost all of the aspects that were explored. But in the case of EG students, the teacher’s affective feedback became even more focused. As regards the CG, since students in this group were not aware of their emotions, they needed much more support and encouragement from their teacher. When compared with the CG group, the EG students were aware of their emotions all the time, and so were able to express and provide emotional support when there was a conflict in the group. As a result of the teacher intervention the results showed that these EG students concentrated more, felt happy, motivated, safe, showed more solidarity to their peers, accepted encouragement to provide more suggestions and opinions, as well as more capable of resolving conflicts.


11

All in all, this analysis proved that there was a significant positive correlation between emotion awareness and teacher’s attitude and feedback. Conclusion The results of this work showed that when made aware of their emotions, students become more conscious of their situation, which prompted them to change and adapt their behavior for the benefit of their group. Moreover, it was observed that their learning performance was more successful when compared to the control group. Also, while it was shown that the CG teachers were supportive of students, the EG teachers who were made aware of the emotions involved, provided more focused interventions. How this research may prove useful: In terms of research methodology these researchers used both qualitative and quantitative methodology. They employed a model of collecting and analyzing discourse, and statistical measures to test relationships and significance of the variables and the validity and reliability of results. This would prove helpful to those who are interested in using research that combines these two methods of data collection. Within the framework of social emotional learning using collaborative learning and problem based learning, teachers who wish to understand better what their students are experiencing during the teaching learning process, might benefit from the tools described in this paper. Classroom teachers who are interested in conducting action research with assistance from their University partners would benefit from exploring the tools, methods and analysis described in this paper. Also, teachers interested in seeking National Board Certification would certainly benefit. Yeager, David S. (2017). Social and Emotional Learning Programs for Adolescents. The Future

of Children, 27(1), 73-94. While it is not unusual to find research that SEL programing is effective for elementary school children, this is not the case for research involving high school students. This comprehensive review of research on programs that impact adolescents begins with the belief that the changes that accompany adolescent development require different SEL programing than that for younger children. Typical SEL programs that directly teach skills and invite children to rehearse those skills have a very poor track record with middle adolescents—roughly aged 14 to 17. This article reviews findings from the field of adolescent psychology, community health, and education to determine which aspects of SEL programing will best resonate with adolescents. This review is followed by recommendations for SEL programs that meet the specific needs of this older age group.


12

The author establishes that SEL is most important during adolescence because academic work becomes more difficult and friendships become less stable. At the same time adolescents expect more autonomy and independence in their personal choices, which makes it difficult for the adults in their lives to provide guidance. The adolescent’s method of processing emotions undergoes a dramatic transformation with the onset of puberty and even minor social difficulties become extremely painful and hard to deal with. In addition, adolescents are sensitive to social cues that signal threats to status or respect, and often become angry over issues of unfairness. Conversely, they become motivated to engage in learning situations when these are authentic, involve social groups, and affirm status and respect. It is the task of the school to find SEL programing that gives adolescents experiences that are in synch with these psycho-social needs, that is to provide experiences that affirm status and respect in authentic situations and provide opportunities for them to contribute to their community in positive ways. To further elaborate his point, Yeager reports that adolescents have four developmental tasks: 1. To stand out: to develop an identity and pursue autonomy 2. To fit in: to find comfortable affiliations and gain acceptance from peers 3. To measure up: to develop competence and find ways to achieve 4. To take hold: to make commitments to particular goals, activities and beliefs Some programs stand out for their effectiveness with adolescents. Rather than teaching them skills, Yeager finds, effective programs for adolescents focus on mindsets and climate. Harnessing adolescents’ developmental motivations, such programs aim to make them feel respected by adults and peers and offer them the chance to gain status and admiration in the eyes of people whose opinions they value. The author posits that the Mindsets-School Climate Model is promising for producing internalized, lasting change. For example, as a result of a Mindsets program, adolescents were willing to learn social skills as long as doing so served the broader purpose of mattering, that is they want to do something of consequence for the world around them. Climate and Mindset Approaches

In addition to the Mindsets-School Climate Model mentioned above, this study reviews several studies that used the climate and mindset approaches to improve adolescent SEL outcomes. They illustrate ways to create climates that are more respectful, or mindsets in which adolescents perceive that healthy choices confer status or that peer conflicts are not necessarily disrespectful. They take three approaches:

1. Creating a mindset that harnesses the adolescent desire for status and respect. In correlational research, Yeager and colleagues found that adolescents who say they’re learning in school so that they can make a positive difference in the world (but not adolescents who say that they’re pursuing an interesting and enjoyable life) showed greater grit; perseverance toward long-term goals and self-control, greater behavioral persistence on a tedious task, and greater persistence in college many months later.


13

2. Creating a climate that’s more respectful toward adolescents. This approach reduces adolescents’ experiences of being disrespected by showing teachers how to create respectful environments. More recently, Anne Gregory, a developmental psychologist at Rutgers University, used a comprehensive teacher training and mentoring program (My Teaching Partner–Secondary) to help 86 high school teachers (with more than 2,000 students among them) create an intellectually challenging but respectful classroom climate. Students got more autonomy in choosing meaningful work, which helped teachers show that they cared. Furthermore, there was a strong racial gap in discipline infractions in the control group that was statistically eliminated in the treatment group, even two years after the teacher training ended. This reduction in classroom discipline infractions for African-American students was strongest when teachers created academically demanding classrooms that respected students’ intellectual competence as rated by third-party observers. That is, making school easier isn’t what led students to respect the rules of the class; it was being challenged and treated as though they could develop competence. In addition, restorative justice programs, which require working collaboratively with young people to repair relationships and reputations after they’ve committed an offense, are now being implemented in schools to convey dignity and respect by honoring adolescents’ competence, while building relationships that create a sense of belonging.

3. Creating a mindset that blunts the power of threats to peer status and respect. Although adolescents shouldn’t be oblivious to social threats, it may be helpful to learn that life or death doesn’t hang in the balance with each incident of embarrassment or peer disrespect. Being mindful of what they are feeling, checking their automatic response, learning that remaining calm, and walking away can change the behavior or assumptions of others, and can lead to elevated respect and status among peers. And teaching the belief that traits and labels are malleable and have the potential to change—called an incremental theory of personality—altars reactions to social conflicts. Interventions based on an incremental theory of personality teach that people have the potential to change (although change may not be easy or certain). Therefore, young people are not fixed in a low status position if bad things happen; likewise, a student’s peers do not remain indefinitely as evil tormenters. This message can change the meaning of social events

In summary, effective programs make adolescents feel respected by adults and peers and offer them the chance to gain status and admiration in the eyes of people whose opinions they value. School personnel looking for programming that meets the needs of adolescents will find this article immensely helpful and will find its guidelines for programs and evaluation valuable. For further investigation, the case studies from SCOPE found at the resource section of this Bibliography provide examples at the secondary school.


14

Gregory, A. & Fergus, E. (2017). Social and Emotional Learning and Equity in School Discipline. The Future of Children, 27(1), 117-136 The purpose of this review is to draw attention to the Discipline Gap – that the percentages of racial minorities and males who receive school suspensions are greatly over represented – and to discuss efforts to reduce the gap. Gregory and Fergus first review federal and state mandates to reduce student suspensions, and they show how some districts (Syracuse, Denver and Cleveland) are embracing SEL in their efforts to do so. Yet even as total suspensions are reduced, Black students and male students are much more likely than others to be suspended or expelled. In comparison, they next discuss the more recent Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) efforts to create equity ecology by focusing not only on students but also on teachers’ beliefs and behaviors in an effort to reduce this disparity. Restorative circles and conferences are thought to offer SEL opportunities for students. In embracing SEL restorative justice circles and procedures as a way to reduce suspensions, the three districts mentioned above are providing students and teachers with procedures that teach students how to manage conflict and learn ways of thinking and behaving that not only resolve conflict but also build community. These and other schools apply restorative approaches to behavior within a multi-tiered system of support. At Tier 1, all students participate in community-building circles: as they sit facing one another, they’re asked to respond to a prompt or question and then take turns voicing their perspectives. At Tier 2, students affected by a minor disciplinary incident all work together in responsive circles to resolve the problem. At Tier 3, everyone involved in a serious disciplinary event participates in restorative conferences, in which a facilitator guides the exchange using a structured set of questions. Ultimately, participants are asked to jointly develop a solution and repair the harm caused. Also at this tier, school administrators and others involved in a student’s return to school after a long-term absence participate in a re-entry process to welcome the student back and to identify any supports the student may need. When participants gather after a discipline incident, they have an opportunity to reflect on such questions as: What happened? What were you thinking about at the time? Who was affected by what you did? How has this affected you and others? What do you think needs to happen to make things right? What do you think you need to do to make things right? Gregory and Fergus feel that they need more research to confirm the effects of restorative justice practices. They hypothesize that these questions may foster students’ self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making, and that SEL programing will provide ways to help students create a sense of responsibility to their community. In addition, they reason that restorative justice and SEL coursework will help teachers respond empathetically to student behavior by helping them to recognize students’ social and emotional development. It is necessary that teachers hold these insights because it’s likely that the


15

prevailing SEL student focused mindset, while a first step, doesn’t sufficiently influence ecological conditions in schools and that it is these conditions that ultimately will reduce the gap in disciplinary outcomes. One of these conditions is the concept of colorblindness. These authors hold that current SEL approaches are colorblind. Colorblindness is founded on three key beliefs: 1. The best way to remove racism is to omit race, gender, and other social identities as descriptors. 2. We should treat people as individuals, without considering their social identities. 3. We should focus on the commonalities among people. While seemingly a positive viewpoint to combat racism, colorblindness may be viewed as a new form of racial ideology. These beliefs hold a false promise of providing equity by not allowing for the confrontation and recognition of the reality of class and cultural biases in school communities. Teachers who fail to understand that racism is systemic may perceive colorblindness as a more elevated form of social awareness. To advance equity, educators could examine their own conscious and unconscious beliefs and consider whether they hold negative stereotypes about students’ cultural and stylistic codes. When they see students of color whose pants sag for example, some teachers may think that this means that the student does not respect the authority of the school or its teachers. From another perspective, it could mean that the student has not yet learned to navigate the culture of the street and the culture of the school. If educators understood more about systemic racism and abuse of power, they might empathize when their students of color describe feeling unfairly treated during a disciplinary incident. This understanding will help educators look beyond the single incident so that they can see racism as a system that favors middle class, White characteristics and behaviors. The authors provide examples of situations where educators could examine how their unconscious beliefs affect their decision-making.

• In a recent experimental study, teachers were shown an office discipline referral for a student with two incidents of misconduct. The researchers varied the name of the disciplined student, sometimes using a stereotypically Black name (Darnell or Deshawn), sometimes a stereotypically White name (Greg or Jake). The teachers indicated that students with stereotypically Black names should be disciplined more severely than those with stereotypically White names. Those harsher sanctions for students with stereotypically Black names may have been affected by implicit racial bias.

• Adults who criticize Black girls for being loud or having an attitude don’t understand the girls’ desire to be heard and seen in the context of gender and race oppression. Teachers with strong relationship-building skills develop mutual understanding with their students, consider multiple perspectives during conflicts, and resolve disputes skillfully. The RULER program developed at Yale University helps teachers recognize, understand, label, express, and regulate emotions.


16

Sympathetic educators can help students recognize and adopt other ways of behaving as they move between school and street cultures. Empathetic teachers would give recognition to students of the extra burden required to switch behaviors (code switch), to teach students to be aware of various situations and contexts, and that they are able to travel between two worlds. Educators can also help students gain awareness that when they are among friends or family, the way they express themselves may be admired. But in another context, the same expressions may be seen as threatening or disruptive. In addition, SEL can also take an activist stance by providing opportunities for students to be seen as experts in promoting equity and justice. Such a shift in the purpose of SEL, the authors hypothesize, would develop students’ sense of power and their role in influencing the thinking about conditions of power and privilege in their community. Programs that encourage community work are such an example. (See the Yaeger paper and the SCOPE case studies at the end of the bibliography.) A Framework in Oakland, CA The Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) is striving to orient its discipline policy toward ecologically and equity-oriented SEL. The authors believe that the policy OUSD is developing may eventually align discipline reforms with ecologically and equity-oriented SEL. These reforms are similar in many ways to those adopted in Syracuse, Denver, and Cleveland. But the OUSD went further by introducing the Manhood Development Program (MDP), which is grounded in equity-oriented SEL. An in-school elective for Black male middle and high school students, the program aims to help these young people develop positive cultural identities, culturally relevant social and emotional competencies, and academic skills. OUSD also joined CASEL’s Collaborating Districts Initiative. After several years of reforms, OUSD made progress in shifting disciplinary practices. From 2011 to 2013, its overall suspension rate dropped from 13.2% to 10.2%; the suspension rate of Black students decreased by 7 percentage points—the greatest decrease relative to other groups. From 2011 to 2014, the number of referrals issued to Black males for disruption or willful defiance declined by 37%. Yet despite progress over several years of reform, the racial discipline gap persisted. In 2013, the suspension rate of Black students (20.5%) remained about ten times higher than that of White students (1.8%). Given these persistently large disparities, the district worked to strengthen its reforms by aligning them with ecologically and equity-oriented SEL. In recent public statements and board policies, OUSD administrators have drawn explicit links between SEL, equity, and system-wide institutional practices and procedures. For example, the district integrated its concerns about equity into an SEL guidance document that explains: “OUSD aims to seamlessly integrate Social Emotional Learning into the academic experience of all our students and across our organization for every adult. We seek to reverse old paradigms predicated on hierarchy, violence, race, and subordination. Instead, equality, mutual respect, collaboration, civic participation, high academic achievement, and joy in learning will be the norm” (p.132).


17

OUSD administrators are also introducing new professional development and learning opportunities for teachers, leaders, and staff members. For example, the district has created a Teacher Growth and Development System that integrates teachers’ goal setting with equity, SEL, and cultural competence. The system’s rubric measures such observable behaviors in the classroom and setting concrete goals for progress. The district believes the rubric will provide a roadmap for improvement. In this way, teachers can improve their own and their students’ social and emotional competencies and increase equitable outcomes in the classroom. The authors conclude that OUSD illustrates how one district is striving to move beyond discipline policy reforms that ignore the role of power and privilege. Since OUSD’s reforms are in the early stages, it is not yet known whether they’ll substantially reduce or eliminate gender and racial disparities in discipline. The district’s challenge now is to bridge the substantial gap between policy and practice. This article will prove helpful to school personnel who are interested in reducing the discipline gap by building an ecological caring community of educators who are not afraid to face issues of racism and bias in their education of children with cultural differences. They can compare their policy and practices with those of the OUSD as indicators of where they could go next.


18

SEL Resources

1. CASEL: (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning).

Guide: Effective Social and Emotional Learning Programs—Preschool and Elementary School Edition. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. http://secondaryguide.casel.org

2. SCOPE: The Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE) Case Studies: Learning by Heart: Social and Emotional Learning in Secondary Schools. This downloadable document contains case studies of five diverse secondary schools, focusing on effective practices and effective programs. They contain sections on research and commentary, case studies and close ups, student voices and taking action. This is one of the few projects that are focused on the secondary level. These case studies offer a view of SEL implementation with a diverse multicultural environment and reflect many of the recommendations mentioned in the above studies. http://www.howyouthlearn.org/SEL_casestudies.html

3. The Leader in Me by Fonzi, J. & Ritchie, K. Warner Center, University of Rochester, Warner Center for Professional Development and Education Reform University of Rochester, PO Box 270425, Rochester, NY 14627 www.rochester.edu/warner/warnercenter, http://blogs.gssd.ca/smuir/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/RochesterLitRev.pdf This literature review was undertaken at the request of the FranklinCovey Company. The purpose was to determine the extent to which FranklinCovey’s leadership program for K-12 students, The Leader in Me, aligns with recent research on effective reform strategies and practices. This literature review provides the framework within which The Leader in Me goals, objectives, informing beliefs, and curriculum design can be examined. 4. American Institute for Research (AIR) is a not for profit behavior and social science research and evaluation organization. They offer districts resources such as research findings, products that help teachers teach, students learn, and school officials to assess programs such as SEL 5. The SEL Center at the Children’s Institute, an affiliate with the U of R, partners with community agencies and schools to strengthen the social and emotional health of children in a variety of different ways. They assist with the implementation of evidence-based prevention and early intervention programs, provide a range of training, assessments, and services to support those who work with children; and conduct research and evaluation to continuously improve efforts to support children’s positive growth and development. They are located at 274 N Goodman St., Suite D 103 (Village Gate), 585-295-1000. The director of the SEL Center is Elizabeth Devaney.

social and emotional learning -...

Documents